ABC Endorses ObamaCare Premise: 'The Need is Obvious'

Photo of Brent Baker.
  • Bookmark and Share

Hours before ABC's Wednesday prime time special with President Obama from the White House, Questions for the President: Prescription for America, a World News piece conveyed the public's doubts that Obama will achieve his goals, but also endorsed Obama's premise that something must be done as reporter David Wright focused on concern over rising costs and a family without insurance before concluding: “Expectations are low, but the need is obvious.”

From Lynchburg, Virginia, Wright reported how “some folks here clearly have their doubts President Obama is going to be able to fix the health care system” as “some worry about big government programs, others that they'll pay higher taxes in the end.” But, he stressed, “Democrats and Republicans alike here told us they hope he can fix it because something needs to be done. Kimberly Gambiladi (sp?) is a stay at home mom. Her husband got laid off two months ago. Now the whole family has no insurance.”

Wright moved on to “a civil engineering firm with 85 employees” where “business has dropped off during the recession. But health premiums haven't.” After the stay at home mom with no insurance  admitted “I don't have the answer. Hopefully, somebody will,” Wright delivered his closing line: “Expectations are low, but the need is obvious.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Anchor Charles Gibson, from the Blue Room at the White House, set up the piece by highlighting how people are happy with their health care, but: “Our new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows 83 percent of Americans are very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of health care. They pretty much like things the way they are. All the same, 85 percent are worried about future costs.”

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Wednesday, June 24 World News:

CHARLES GIBSON: As we noted earlier in the broadcast, we have come to the White House to talk with the President tonight about health care reform. We are also hearing from people across the country about what's working and what's not. Our new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows 83 percent of Americans are very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of health care. They pretty much like things the way they are. All the same, 85 percent are worried about future costs. David Wright traveled to one city that has seen its share of recent changes, and takes our "Closer Look.”

DAVID WRIGHT: Lynchburg, Virginia, population 72,000. A town with battle scars. The local Civil War monument honors Confederate troops.

BARACK OBAMA: It is good to be in Virginia.

WRIGHT: Barack Obama campaigned in Lynchburg, but he lost this part of Virginia to John McCain. Now, as he launches his health care reform initiative, nobody we spoke with here predicts smooth sailing.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN #1: He might try, but I don't think he'll be successful. Nobody else has been yet.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN #2: At least he's getting it started.

WRIGHT: Some folks here clearly have their doubts President Obama is going to be able to fix the health care system. Some worry about big government programs, others that they'll pay higher taxes in the end. But Democrats and Republicans alike here told us they hope he can fix it because something needs to be done. Kimberly Gambiladi (sp?) is a stay at home mom. Her husband got laid off two months ago. Now the whole family has no insurance.

KIMBERLY GAMBILADI (SP?): The biggest fear is if anything happened with my daughter and not having the coverage-

WRIGHT: Many seem to be happy with their own doctors, but don't trust that their insurance is an adequate safety net. And do they trust Obama?

DR. THOMAS EPPES, FAMILY PRACTITIONER: I think it's government in general that they don't trust to do a good job.

WRIGHT: Tough time with the bad economy.

WILEY JOHNSON, HURT AND PROFFITT INC: It has been.

WRIGHT: At Hurt and Proffit, a civil engineering firm with 85 employees, business has dropped off during the recession. But health premiums haven't.

JOHNSON: We have seen double digit increases for the past four years.

WRIGHT: Workers are paying more for less coverage. But that's better than no coverage at all.

GAMBILADI: I don't have the answer. Hopefully, somebody will.

WRIGHT: Expectations are low, but the need is obvious. David Wright, ABC, News, Lynchburg, Virginia.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

“Expectations are low,

“Expectations are low, but the need is obvious.” 

But this won't be an infomercial.

<Chris Matthews imitation> :  HAH!

Some worry about big government programs, others that they'll pay higher taxes in the end. 

Higher taxes??? You don't say! I'm sure Gibson et al will keep reminding those folks that only people earning over $250,000 will be paying the taxes!

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see how much it costs when it's free!  P.J. O'Rourke

 

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

 

WRIGHT: Some folks here

WRIGHT: Some folks here clearly have their doubts President Obama is going to be able to fix the health care system. Some worry about big government programs, others that they'll pay higher taxes in the end. But Democrats and Republicans alike here told us they hope he can fix it because something needs to be done.

  Right, obama with no medical training is going to 'fix' healthcare to satisfy the needs for 300,000,000 Americans whose medical needs range from the preborn to the very elderly.  Why doesn't obama just stick to what he knows, making cars and managing banks.

Wright:...."But Democrats

Wright:...."But Democrats and Republicans alike here told us they hope he can fix it....."

Yea and who better to fix everything that's ever smelled anything like it may possibly be wrong, than the god the liberals like to refer to as "government."  Bunch of crap.

I figure 85 percent of us

I figure 85 percent of us are pretty happy with our health care and our health insurance.  So that means we need to destroy the  whole system. After there is a crisis... a manufactured one at that.

"Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink."  P.J.O'Rourke

Go figure

I know 50 people who don't have insurance coverage, as they choose not to purchase it through their employer. The average salary of each is about $75,000 a year. They have lake lots, speed boats, Harley's..all the great things in life. They will all tell you the same thing when asked what will they do if something happens. Emergency room where they can go and get treatment. In other words, they don't seem to see an issue with me picking up the tab in increased cost.

Pharmacutical companies spend over $4,000,000,000 a year on advertising for drugs on TV, radio and print. Hey, someone pays for that right..yes, us.

Government waste is out of control, with all those in office having ties to some lobby, interest group, etc., that they glean money from, get sweet deals..and we pay for it.

In the end, we pay, will pay for those who don't care to. I have no issues with paying for those few who can not. But for the illegals, bums and such who can but don't, I have no heart for. These folks are real lucky I am not in charge, as I would fix this real quick.

Angry White Dude's Healthcare Plan

1.  No free healthcare for illegal immigrants

2.  Cap ridiculous jury awards against malpractice and disbar any attorney who brings more than three lawsuits (ones thrown out of court) in their career.

3.  Cut taxes on the American taxpayer.

Those are just a few ideas.

Angry White Dude

www.angrywhitedude.c...

If I may add to your

If I may add to your list:

4.  Require people to pay for every office visit according to their means.

5. Those who can't pay must do some sort of community service when possible, even if it means shelving books in a public library.

Point 5 is kinda weird cause

Point 5 is kinda weird cause I've actually volunteered at my local library because I like books..but they won't take me. Seems it's against some union rule. 

I volunteer walking dogs at

I volunteer walking dogs at a dog shelter.  Seems unions won't pick up sh&*  so it's not a problem.

→ Wrong Radical

Unions lifted Obama up on their shoulders in the last election.

We will Barry you! - Russian Prophecy

Cool Arrow you've got me

Cool Arrow you've got me there!

Shame

Shame on you, calling our , ah...leader a POS. Tsk,Tsk.

Point 2

Sounds great, but just imagine all those out-of-work malpractice lawyers walking the street--destitute.

 The very thought sends a "tingle up my leg."

"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." - General George Patton Jr

Dave's health care plan is mind-numbingly simple

Get government, at ALL levels, the hell out of it completely.

Whatever problems that still exist will right themselves rather quickly.

If the government "educated" sheeple of this country are f'ing stupid enough to allow the grossly incompetent, affirmative action-hiring federal government to take over the best health care system on the planet, then they will richly deserve what is coming their way.

I don't give a rat's ass anymore, as America has become too f'ing stoopid to survive for much longer.

-Dave

Obama's health care "reform" plan is to blow up the building in order to fix a leak in the roof-Herman Cain

If the government

If the government "educated" sheeple of this country are f'ing stupid
enough to allow the grossly incompetent, affirmative action-hiring
federal government to take over the best health care system on the
planet, then they will richly deserve what is coming their way. 

Too bad stupid crap doesn't just effect the "they" that you mention.  "They," being freakin stupid, effect ME and you, and everyone else with sense.

Of course ABC endorses

Of course ABC endorses obambicare, they gave him a whole day of free infomercials.

EE IS

Obama's Helth Scare Show is about to begin.

Then tomorrow, we all call our Represetative and Senators and tell them HELL NO!

 

 

"Gov. Palin has been subjected to one of the most massive and dishonest pile-on smear attacks in the history of liberal media."  -- Lowell Ponte

I'm thinking we have a flop!

Obama is sweating and hasn't addressed a single question. He seems really off his gAme. Maybe we can get an open thread on this.

   They should have

   They should have brought out Billy Mays to sell the healthcare!  He can sell anything.  And if you call in the next 10 minutes he'll double the offer!!  They will throw in healthcare for pets absolutely free!!!

ABC Obama TV

I had to see some of the infomercial. Obama's answers are his regular boilerplate. What is broken, anecdotal stories, lofty statements about what "We" will do. Nothing about the details, no answers on the cost-benefit relationship, no answer on how to borrow enough money to pay for it.

The audience looks like a cross section of a wine-tasting, with a few "others" thrown in. A pretty healthy group of people, it certainly does not look like a cross section of the patients one finds at the ER on a Saturday morning. I wonder what that group would be 'asting' the President about their lack of insurance coverage and green cards as they tell him they are not "happy with their plan". 

One more thing. Obama is really slick. He can sound like an expert on medicine, health administration, the science of global warming (atmospheric chemistry!), economics, and many other fields. He is almost Godlike! 

Watched about the first

Watched about the first 10-15 minutes of it, and one expert in the audience asked Obama what needed to be done to fix health care.  Of course Obama dodged the question like he dodged the planted question on Tuesday.

In the case that you think

In the case that you think your Republican representatives are sitting on their hands, please read this health care counter proposal:

The GOP Can Stop ObamaCare
The public is in no mood for drastic changes in current coverage.

It's extremely unlikely that Republicans will be able to pass their own health-care plan in this Congress. But in politics you can't beat something with nothing, so it is critical that the GOP offers an alternative to President Barack Obama's government-run monstrosity.

Americans will listen more closely to Republicans if they make empirical and specific arguments against Mr. Obama's attempted government takeover of the nation's health system. But they must also offer proposals that families, small-businesspeople and health-care providers will applaud.

President Barack Obama before delivering remarks on health care reform at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association on Monday in Chicago.

Fortunately, Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Richard Burr of North Carolina, and Reps. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Devin Nunes of California have devised a plan that will likely appeal to anyone interested in making health insurance more affordable and portable.

Their proposal -- called the Patients' Choice Act -- is to leave in place the tax deduction companies receive for providing employees with health insurance and to create a "Medi-Choice" tax rebate that will give individuals $2,200 and families $5,700 to spend on health insurance.

The rebate will make health insurance more affordable, especially for young people. It also will make health insurance portable, which will free people from being locked into jobs they hate because they are afraid of losing their health insurance.

The Coburn-Ryan plan also helps the hard-to-insure and chronically ill because it shares their risk across all insurance companies, providing lower premiums than they might find now. It would help those in Medicaid because they receive private insurance rather than being forced into a one-size-fits-all government program in which doctors are increasingly refusing to participate.

Before Karl became known as "The Architect" of President Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns, he was president of Karl Rove + Company, an Austin-based public affairs firm that worked for Republican candidates, nonpartisan causes, and nonprofit groups. His clients included over 75 Republican U.S. Senate, Congressional and gubernatorial candidates in 24 states, as well as the Moderate Party of Sweden.

The House GOP also formed a Health Care Solutions Group that unveiled proposals yesterday. The group wanted to make health care more affordable, expand availability, and promote healthier life choices. It did this by proposing two-dozen ways to improve existing law to make it easier and more cost-effective to buy health insurance.

One proposal is to give families who purchase their own insurance a tax benefit similar to the one companies get for providing health benefits. Another proposal is to pass medical liability reforms that will reduce costly junk lawsuits. Still another would allow small businesses to team up to buy insurance at a group discount. The group also wants to allow families to save money tax-free for a wide range of health expenses and permit children to stay on their parents' policies until age 25.

Under the group's proposals, Medicaid beneficiaries would get the flexibility to choose private coverage, rather than being locked into a government-run program. The group is also calling for stepping up efforts to detect and punish Medicare and Medicaid fraud, which costs an estimated $60 billion a year.

Individual Republicans are also stepping forward with health-reform ideas, such as creating a national health-insurance market that would allow Americans to buy insurance across state lines. Sens. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) and Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) have offered other ideas, including expanding community health centers.

This is the first time congressional Republicans as a group have been comfortable talking about health care. It may be the product of necessity, but it is also necessary to get a robust debate on health-care reform.

Republican efforts will be helped by a recent Congressional Budget Office report that found that Sen. Ted Kennedy's health-care reform would cost at least $1 trillion over the next 10 years and still leave 36 million Americans uninsured (it may be slightly more once all the details are released). Estimates for the health-care bill that the Senate Finance Committee is drafting with help from the White House are coming in around $1.6 trillion over 10 years.

As the debate now shifts from broad generalities to the specifics of how health-care reform would work and how the government will pay for it, the GOP has an opportunity to stop the nationalization of the health-care industry. The more scrutiny it gets, the less appealing Obama-Care will become. And the more Democrats have to talk about creating a new value-added tax or junk food taxes to pay for it, the more Americans will recoil.

Republican credibility on health care depends on whether the party offers positive alternatives that build on the strengths of American medicine. As long as the choice was between reform and the status quo, the public was likely to go with the reformers. But if the debate is whether to go with costly, unnecessary reforms or with common-sense changes, then Republicans have a chance to appeal to fiscally conservative independents and Democrats and win this one. It is still possible to stop ObamaCare in its tracks. If Republicans can do that, they will win public confidence on an issue that will dominate politics for decades.

Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

Which would you

Which would you choose?

___ I'm for the freedom to choose medical treatment for myself and my family and also for choosing my method of providing for payment. I want expanded choices and low-cost insurance that allow me to benefit from healthy lifestyle choices and prudent decisions. I want my family to benefit from cost-saving decisions, not the government or the insurance company. I'm in favor of helping the needy, but without imposing shoddy, heavily rationed care on everyone. I'm for transparency and seeing where my tax dollars go. I'm tired of having money taken from the hard workers for the benefit of the improvident and of politicians who want to keep people poor and dependent in order to expand the government's power.

___ I'm for the government takeover of medicine based on politicians' false promises that they can guarantee quality healthcare for all. I think that the harder you work and the more you earn, the more you should have to pay into the big healthcare money pot. I think government-chosen experts should decide who is allowed to get what from the pool of available services. I don't think anybody should be allowed to earn a profit from providing better service or more effective treatment. I don't think patients should be allowed to vote with their dollars for what they consider to be quality care, but that care should be apportioned at discretion of government appointees with the goal of maximizing population health. We all need to sacrifice for the common good.

If you chose the first one, write, e-mail and/or call your elected representatives and the White House.  Yes, even the White House.  They need to hear your concern at what they are attempting to do as well. 

If you chose the second one, you are a misguided liberal destined to create socialist health misery for all but the most wealthy amongst us. 

Doctor of Dumbocracy

Q. What do you call a man who ignores Doctors' advice?

A. Barack Obama

Right to Choose Best Care
In ABC News Health Care Forum, President Answers Questions About Reform
By JAKE TAPPER and KAREN TRAVERS

President Obama struggled to explain today whether his health care reform proposals would force normal Americans to make sacrifices that wealthier, more powerful people — like the president himself — wouldn’t face.

“For God's sake, somebody tell Obama that a TRILLION is one MILLION MILLION!!!!

If the economy is good, and

If the economy is good, and we are at or near 0 unemployment, and people are making more money then the cost of health care going up wouldn't be much of an issue.  They can only charge what the system will bear.  Me thinks that the cost increases are largely due to lack of competition in local markets (who's going to go across country to get a broken arm set at a cheaper hospital they found online?) and the knowledge that the government will pick up most of the tab for those who can't pay, so why not charge more?

But then there's the supply and demand part.  There are only X number of doctors at any given time and with our population increasing and getting older, there's simply more demand for them.

Also, with more procedures becoming available due to advances in medical technology, more hours can be spent with a patient now whereas in years past it would have been less or none because there wasn't much the physician could do for them.

In other words, it could simply be that we are screwed no matter what in this area.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).

Stepping onto my soapbox.....

Since Risky behavior is a major cost to health insurance...we stop covering those people.  If you decide that you want to sleep around, and then contract a STD such as AIDS, you are on your own.  The drugs to treat AIDS are not cheap.  They can run up to $25,000.00 a MONTH, and with the quality of drugs out there, your life can be prolonged for 15/20/25 years. (You do the math)  Now since insurance companies are not allowed to drop you from thier roles if you contract AIDS, they have to pay the costs of these drugs.  Last time I looked, insurance companies were not in the business of losing money, so they raise thier rates to everyone.  If you didn't have insurance when you contracted AIDS, then you turn to the government, and they pay for it.  Since I am the government (well, my pocketbook anyway)  I pay for it.  All we have to do is deny coverage to these people, and we can save BILLIONS every year.  I"m not talking about denying coverage to people who contract AIDS through no fault of thier own, (i.e. Children, rape victims), but if you want to sleep around or shoot up, don't ask me to pay for it when your personal actions endanger your life.  

It may sound cold and heartless,  but I choose not to engage in these risky behaviors, and more that likely will not contract a STD of any kind, let alone AIDS. 

It really irks me when a liberal tells me that I have no right to judge them and thier behavior, but I have EVERY right to do it when it costs me money.

 I'll get off my soapbox now. 

"An Ethical man knows it's wrong to cheat on his wife, a Moral man won't do it"  Ducky-NCIS

 

This is a government cased problem

The solutions are easy.

This problem has grown to this mess because the politicians want the few to pay all the costs of the many. The many, do not want to work or to pay to take care of themselves. This give the politicians great power. 

Lawsuits-easy fix, if you bring a lawsuit and lose you pay the other parties cost. This is how the legal systems work around the world and their is no lawsuit problems in any other country except the US. Only in the US can one sue without fear of losing anything.

I love how everyone wants to blame Insurance Companies. Anyone out there trying to cash in on these "cash cows"? The answer is no. Insurance Companies are the last place people think they will make a return on investment, so why does anyone think Insurance Companies are the problem of high costs? The real problem with Insurance Companies is the same one with the Government, there will be no difference..As long as someone else pays the bill this will never correct itself.

Simple way to view our current problem. Give everyone $10,000 and tell them they have a choice. You can pay for insurance for your health care, or you can buy cars, TV's and cell phones with the money. What do you think these voters will do? Your are correct, buy anything but Insurance. They just do not want to have to take care of themselves.

This can easily be turned around. Quit having hospitals take care of the sick if they have no insurance, period. After a few thousand highly publicized deaths...guess how many people would have Insurance? Guess how many illegals would go home?

One other thing, get the government the hell out of the way.

jessieH  As I have said

jessieH  As I have said before, name one thing the govt. has fixed or repaired...........                         The govt. is the problem. R. Reagan

"competition" chicago style

In both his news conference and infomercial, the President almost taunted private insurers abIout "competing" with his proposed "public option". As a by-product of the Chicago Machine, "competition" to him may mean something different than what most of us would assume, like the same rules, a level playing field, things like that. Has anyone heard about eliminating the barriers private companies have for interstate sales? Mandates? Of course not.In the private sector, premiums are a function of: Risk; the cost of actual previous experience; administrative expenses; taxes; profit (he hates that word) margin and RESERVES FOR FUTURE CLAIMS,(the reserves for VA,zero;Medicaid,zero; Medicare,$31trillion UNFUNDED liability).  Private insurer costs are offset by investment earnings that a "public option" won't have. What replaces not only the investment earnings but lost investment capital for the economy? Isn't it clear Obama wants to control both risk and capital,the 2 primary elemnts of a market economy?  An unlevel playing field tilts the "game" Chicago Machine style to the "public option" and will lead, through "competition" to the desired goal, a single payor system.  To paraphrase Alinsky: the organizer must have sight of the long term goal, but must work towards and appreciate UNCHANGABLE incremental successes.  Go Comrade Go.